MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W114377542 · doi:10.2144/03346st02

Two-Color Image Analysis Discriminates between Mineralized and Unmineralized Bone Nodules In Vitro

2003· article· en· W114377542 on OpenAlexafffund
Kelly A. Purpura, Jane E. Aubin, Peter W. Zandstra

Bibliographic record

VenueBioTechniques · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthT.J. Martell Foundation
KeywordsCalvariaIn vitroProgenitor cellBiologyNodule (geology)Computational biologyComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringCell biologyPathologyStem cellBiochemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Functional assays of progenitor cell capacity for colony formation in vitro typically depend on the investigator's expertise with quantification. The ability to enumerate and analyze colony types with standardized criteria with no bias would be a useful tool for research and drug development. We report the development of a two-color automated analysis system for colony-forming unit-osteoblasts that is capable of reporting progenitor frequency and bone nodule number size, and type (mineralized or unmineralized). Our image analysis system was validated using the rat calvaria cell model to measure in vitro bone nodule development. With computer-aided image analysis, data on nodules can be rapidly generated with a minimum of user bias and fatigue. This novel tool will distinguish mineralized and unmineralized bone nodules, facilitates quantification, enable large-scale experimental design, allow for long-term data storage and tracking, and lead to the identification of new parameters that impact bone development.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioTechniquesSame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207